Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of inflammatory markers for infected diabetic foot ulcer.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY Journal of tissue viability Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1016/j.jtv.2024.09.007
Hua Chen, Shasha Mei, Yu Zhou, Jiezhi Dai
{"title":"Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of inflammatory markers for infected diabetic foot ulcer.","authors":"Hua Chen, Shasha Mei, Yu Zhou, Jiezhi Dai","doi":"10.1016/j.jtv.2024.09.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of ESR, CPR, PCT, and WBC in patients with infected diabetic foot ulcer (DFU).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Cochrane databases, and Web of Knowledge databases were searched, without language restriction, to July 2023. Original studies were selected that reported the performance of ESR, CPR, PCT, and WBC in diagnosing infected DFU. To assess the diagnostic value of biomarkers for infected DFU, pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies with 765 patients were identified in our meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ESR was 0.82 (95 % CI: 0.68-0.91) and 0.83 (95 % CI: 0.69-0.91) respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CRP was 0.81 (95 % CI: 0.65-0.91) and 0.91 (95 % CI: 0.79-0.96) respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of PCT was 0.76 (95 % CI: 0.65-0.85) and 0.89 (95 % CI: 0.78-0.95) respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of WBC was 0.75 (95 % CI: 0.64-0.83) and 0.79 (95 % CI: 0.67-0.88) respectively. CRP showed the best diagnostic accuracy at distinguishing infected DFU from noninfected DFU with an AUC of 0.93, followed by PCT (AUC of 0.89), ESR (AUC of 0.89), and WBC (AUC of 0.84).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CPR levels had high efficiency in distinguishing infected DFU from noninfected DFU, followed by PCT, ESR and WBC. All of these biomarkers could be helpful for early diagnosis of infected DFU. New biomarkers for improving medical decision in diagnosis of infected DFU are highly desirable.</p>","PeriodicalId":17392,"journal":{"name":"Journal of tissue viability","volume":" ","pages":"598-607"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of tissue viability","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2024.09.007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of ESR, CPR, PCT, and WBC in patients with infected diabetic foot ulcer (DFU).

Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Cochrane databases, and Web of Knowledge databases were searched, without language restriction, to July 2023. Original studies were selected that reported the performance of ESR, CPR, PCT, and WBC in diagnosing infected DFU. To assess the diagnostic value of biomarkers for infected DFU, pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) were calculated.

Results: Ten studies with 765 patients were identified in our meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ESR was 0.82 (95 % CI: 0.68-0.91) and 0.83 (95 % CI: 0.69-0.91) respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CRP was 0.81 (95 % CI: 0.65-0.91) and 0.91 (95 % CI: 0.79-0.96) respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of PCT was 0.76 (95 % CI: 0.65-0.85) and 0.89 (95 % CI: 0.78-0.95) respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of WBC was 0.75 (95 % CI: 0.64-0.83) and 0.79 (95 % CI: 0.67-0.88) respectively. CRP showed the best diagnostic accuracy at distinguishing infected DFU from noninfected DFU with an AUC of 0.93, followed by PCT (AUC of 0.89), ESR (AUC of 0.89), and WBC (AUC of 0.84).

Conclusion: CPR levels had high efficiency in distinguishing infected DFU from noninfected DFU, followed by PCT, ESR and WBC. All of these biomarkers could be helpful for early diagnosis of infected DFU. New biomarkers for improving medical decision in diagnosis of infected DFU are highly desirable.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对糖尿病足溃疡感染炎症标志物诊断准确性的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:目的是评估血沉、心率、血细胞计数和白细胞在糖尿病足溃疡患者中的诊断价值:目的:评估感染性糖尿病足溃疡(DFU)患者血沉、心磷脂、PCT和白细胞的诊断价值:方法:在MEDLINE、Embase、BIOSIS、Cochrane数据库和Web of Knowledge数据库中进行检索,语言不限,检索期至2023年7月。筛选出报告了血沉、心磷脂、PCT 和白细胞在诊断感染性 DFU 方面表现的原创性研究。为评估生物标志物对感染性 DFU 的诊断价值,计算了汇总的敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比(PLR)、阴性似然比(NLR)、诊断几率比(DOR)和汇总接收者操作特征曲线下面积(ROC-AUC):我们的荟萃分析确定了 10 项研究,共 765 名患者。ESR 的集合敏感性和特异性分别为 0.82(95 % CI:0.68-0.91)和 0.83(95 % CI:0.69-0.91)。CRP 的汇总敏感性和特异性分别为 0.81(95 % CI:0.65-0.91)和 0.91(95 % CI:0.79-0.96)。PCT 的汇总敏感性和特异性分别为 0.76(95 % CI:0.65-0.85)和 0.89(95 % CI:0.78-0.95)。白细胞的集合敏感性和特异性分别为 0.75(95 % CI:0.64-0.83)和 0.79(95 % CI:0.67-0.88)。CRP在区分感染性DFU和非感染性DFU方面显示出最佳诊断准确性,AUC为0.93,其次是PCT(AUC为0.89)、ESR(AUC为0.89)和WBC(AUC为0.84):结论:CPR水平在区分感染性DFU和非感染性DFU方面具有较高的效率,其次是PCT、血沉和白细胞。所有这些生物标志物都有助于感染性 DFU 的早期诊断。我们非常需要新的生物标志物来改进诊断感染性 DFU 的医疗决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of tissue viability
Journal of tissue viability DERMATOLOGY-NURSING
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
16.00%
发文量
110
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Tissue Viability is the official publication of the Tissue Viability Society and is a quarterly journal concerned with all aspects of the occurrence and treatment of wounds, ulcers and pressure sores including patient care, pain, nutrition, wound healing, research, prevention, mobility, social problems and management. The Journal particularly encourages papers covering skin and skin wounds but will consider articles that discuss injury in any tissue. Articles that stress the multi-professional nature of tissue viability are especially welcome. We seek to encourage new authors as well as well-established contributors to the field - one aim of the journal is to enable all participants in tissue viability to share information with colleagues.
期刊最新文献
Advancing burn wound healing with an innovative in situ gelling probiotic microparticle formulation employing quality by design (QbD) principles. Corrigendum to "Factors associated with adherence to prevention guidelines of pressure injuries among Jordanian nurses in critical care units", [Journal of Tissue Viability, 34(1), February 2025, 100853]. The role of biomaterials-based scaffolds in advancing skin tissue construct. Application of infrared thermography for predicting pressure injury healing: A prospective study. Diabetic foot ulcer related pain and its impact on health-related quality of life.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1